The Obama administration has broken the law, issuing oil leases across California without examining the risks of fracking. A federal judge ruled that the administration has “completely ignored” environmental concerns upon issuing the leases.

In response to a lawsuit filed by environmentalist groups, US
Magistrate Judge Paul Grewal ruled that the US Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) violated the law by distributing oil drilling
rights before reviewing the potential risks associated with
fracking.

“BLM’s dismissal of any development scenario involving
fracking as ‘outside of its jurisdiction’ simply did not provide
the ‘hard look’ at the issue that NEPA requires,” Grewal
said during Sunday’s ruling in San Jose, Calif.

While the ruling highlights the flaws of the Obama
administration, it is largely viewed as a landmark victory by
environmentalists who have been fighting against the procedures
they fear might harm the environment.

“It’s the first federal court opinion we’re aware of that
explicitly holds that federal agencies have to analyze the
environmental impacts of fracking when carrying out an oil and
gas leasing program,” Brendan Cummings, a lawyer for the
Center for Biological Diversity, which was involved in filing the
lawsuit, told Reuters.

“This is an important decision that recognizes the
significant risks that fracking poses to California’s land, air
and water,” Cummings told Bloomberg News in a separate
e-mail. “In an era of dangerous climate change, the federal
government should not be leasing public land for extreme forms of
fossil fuel extraction.”

As a result of the court decision, which was made public Monday,
drilling will be banned on the 2,500 acres of California land
that were leased out for oil and gas development in 2011. The
land lies on the Monterey Shale Formation, which is home to one
of the largest shale oil deposits in the US. With an estimated 15
billion barrels of oil, the 20,000-acres that make up the
Monterey Shale Formation account for 64 percent of the nation’s
oil deposits.

Environmentalists are concerned that since California is prone to
droughts and earthquakes, fracking could contaminate local water
supplies and pollute the air. Some residents located near the oil
and gas producing sites claim their homes are cracking due to the
drilling. Members of the Sierra Club and the South Monterey
County, the groups responsible for the lawsuit, also claim that
fracking could trigger seismic activity.

“Fracking is happening completely unregulated in the state of
California,” Brenna Norton, an organizer with Food and Water
Watch, said last
summer. “Oil and gas companies don’t have to say where they
frack or what chemicals they are injecting into water, possibly
close to your drinking water.”

Environmentalists have also argued
that chemical exposure from gas fracking sites can cause health
complications. About 70 percent of residents located near the
Marcellus Shale natural gas field last year reported an increase
in throat irritation, and 80 percent reported sinus problems. A
number of European countries have already banned fracking, and
Germany might
soon join them.

But in the US, the potential risks have not even been given a
second glance by the BLM – a move that Judge Grewal found
surprising.

“The potential risk for contamination from fracking, while
unknown, is not so remote or speculative to be completely
ignored,” he wrote in the court ruling.

Meanwhile, California-based oil companies are hoping that the
court will let them continue drilling once fracking is deemed
‘safe’. Tupper Hull, a spokesman for the refinery group Western
States Petroleum Association, told Reuters that the judge only
ruled against the BLM process – not fracking itself. He said he’s
viewing the ruling as a ‘delay’, but said that “hopefully the
court will ultimately allow the lease to go forward and
production to take place.”

The court ruling currently affects four oil-drilling leases.
Judge Grewal said that he is only examining the legal issues
surrounding the distribution of these leases – not the risks
involved with fracking.

“What is before us is the legal question of whether the BLM
actions are issue in this case were ‘abritrary, capricious, an
abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with the
law,’” Grewal wrote. “What is not is the policy question
of whether fracking in the Monterey Shale or anywhere else is a
good thing or a bad thing.”